Monster TULPAR T7 V4.3

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 52%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (41st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 59 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith an average single core score, this CPU can handle browsing the web, email, video playback and the majority of general computing tasks including light gaming when coupled with an appropriate GPU. Finally, with a gaming score of 51.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics4.94% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive158% is an exceptional SSD score. This drive is suitable for heavy workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and allow for fast transfers of multi-gigabyte files.
Memory16GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 16GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Very high background CPU (46%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemMonster TULPAR T7 V4.3  (all builds)
MotherboardMONSTER TULPAR T7 V4.3
Memory12.4 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.7 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit renk
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20151221
Uptime0 Days
Run DateOct 09 '22 at 13:50
Run Duration127 Seconds
Run User TUR-User
Background CPU 46%

 PC Performing as expected (41st percentile)

Actual performance vs. expectations. The graphs show user score (x) vs user score frequency (y).

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 2.6 GHz, turbo 3.1 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (18th percentile)
51.8% Above average
Memory 56.5
1-Core 76.4
2-Core 145
53% 92.5 Pts
4-Core 253
8-Core 418
41% 336 Pts
64-Core 433
27% 433 Pts
Poor: 34%
This bench: 51.8%
Great: 69%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 530 (Mobile Skylake)
Clevo(1558 6540) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 30.0.101.1340
Performing above expectations (81st percentile)
4.94% Terrible
Lighting 5.7
Reflection 56.8
Parallax 6.1
5% 22.9 fps
MRender 6
Gravity 5.4
Splatting 8.2
6% 6.53 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 4.94%
Great: 6%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 950 NVMe PCIe M.2 512GB-$330
386GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 1B0QBXX7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1196 1319 1258 1216 1273 1254 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (10th percentile)
158% Outstanding
Read 929
Write 843
Mixed 595
SusWrite 1,252
204% 905 MB/s
4K Read 22.3
4K Write 38.6
4K Mixed 27.9
90% 29.6 MB/s
DQ Read 466
DQ Write 255
DQ Mixed 334
256% 352 MB/s
Poor: 138%
This bench: 158%
Great: 283%
HGST Travelstar 7K1000 2.5" 1TB
887GB free
Firmware: JB0OA3J0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 133 135 130 133 133 133 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (96th percentile)
75.2% Very good
Read 129
Write 132
Mixed 28.2
SusWrite 133
76% 106 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.6
123% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 35%
This bench: 75.2%
Great: 75%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
G.SKILL F4 DDR4 2666 C18 1x16GB
1 of 4 slots used
16GB SODIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2667 MHz
Performing way below expectations (1st percentile)
28.3% Poor
MC Read 10.4
MC Write 11.8
MC Mixed 9.2
30% 10.5 GB/s
SC Read 4.3
SC Write 7.5
SC Mixed 4.2
15% 5.33 GB/s
Latency 138
29% 138 ns
Poor: 37%
This bench: 28.3%
Great: 50%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

L1/L2/L3 CPU cache and main memory (DIMM) access latencies in nano seconds

Typical TULPAR T7 V4.3 Builds (Compare 4 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 8%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 57%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk

System: Monster TULPAR T7 V4.3

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. Because UserBenchmark’s data often contradicts their marketing spiel, they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of money on flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers get comparable real-world performance at a fraction of the cost.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Additionally, brands spend more on marketing weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated reviews in an online community. It's obvious that the 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't interested in promoting billon-dollar brands...
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of pursuing lucrative sponsorships with billion-dollar PC brands, we have dedicated the last 13 years to providing comprehensive and accurate data to our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again and collectively save millions every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback